You’re right, my memory simplfied the position too much. I think there was another pawn which if time had permitted would have been taken and then in normal course of events the other pawn would have marched in. In reality the person that loss on time was at one point way ahead material wise but the time scramble allowed his opponent to come quite aways back. And then to actually win on time.
So let me see if I understand this correctly. Would I have the right, under rule 21J, to appeal the TD’s decision to deny time-delay to a special referee from somewhere else instead of an appeal’s committee (rule 21I)?
A good question. I would think you would have that right of appeal. In a tournament that I played in a dispute was resolved after consulting a special referee. I believe Tim Just was called. It took less than 10 minutes.
As to your issue of no delay being used. There are still a few dinosaurs who as TDs hate the idea of delay clocks. They don’t like the rule and will not apply it. Maybe if Palin becomes VP, she’ll ask the oil companies to buy some digital clocks with delay features for Alaska’s players to use.
The use of a special referee is considered preferable to a local appeals committee. One important reason for this is that it is often difficult to assemble a local appeals committee which is TD-certified at levels higher than, or even equal to, the TD whose ruling is being appealed.
The question is, what would your TD do in this case, if you appealed to a special referee? If he is willing to defy the rule on delay, he may do the same on your right to appeal. Then you would lose in the short run, but may win in the long run by protesting to the rules committee or the TDCC (tournament director certification committee).
Bill Smythe
Whether you do this or call a special referee, you’ll probably lose in the long run as well by ticking off the TD who most likely isn’t interested in changing his mind about time delay. He might find ways to make your chess life not so fun, quit directing altogether, or simply announce in advance no time delay, in which case he’s well within HIS “rights.” Then what have you accomplished?
I think the only real options are
a) become a TD yourself and run tournaments the way you’d like to see them done (or maybe you just have to be the organizer and stipulate time delay be used), and/or even better,
b) start down a path of friendly persuasion, which will take some time to be effective but in the long run yield the best results for everyone if the TD does eventually come around.
Grant Neilley
Let’s back up a step or two here.
First, technically, what everyone has said so far is correct. t/d IS a right, if its absence is not announced in advance. The TD may overrule you and then you only recourse is to appeal. I can understand your concern if this were your first event, and this was a surprise to you.
However, since you know of the problem, why not open a dialogue with your TD and/or organizer? In fact, take it a step farther and become one.
Bring it up at a club meeting, board meeting, or whatever means is used to organize the event in the first place. Open the discussion, point out the rules, explain the reasons for the delay concept and then the event will be run accordingly. Doing this at an event itself, when everyone is under pressure, only creates hard feelings and will probably not change any minds. But an open discussion under non-pressure circumstances might.
Better yet, become a TD and run events with t/d yourself. After the locals see how well it works it will become acceptable and in fact, desirable.
I will answer this statement as follows:
-
I have tried to talk to the TD’s at club meetings in town, but they do not wish to accept it. They have a very conservative outlook of the rules, and do not wish to see change.
-
I am a TD myself now. I am in the process of creating a chess club at the local university. This will take some time to perform, but shouldn’t be stress-inducing. Once the club is created and registered with the USCF, it will be possible to host tournaments where time-delay is permitted.
-
The majority of players where I live don’t know of time-delay. When I brought it up, it’s reception was poorly received. Players are used to playing without time-delay. If I organize tournaments, it would not be absolutely fair to say that players MUST play with time-delay, given the fact that there are few delay clocks where I live.
I have been trying to incorporate time delay since my return home in January. The players don’t care for it at all, and the TD’s don’t want it incorporated. Aside from appealing to a special referee (rule 21J) or filing a complaint with the TDCC, I am at a loss as to what can be done. I don’t want to see the TD’s where I live get harsh punishments (since they are the only ones who have been making chess tournaments where I live) but I don’t want my rights as a player to be taken advantage of just because they dislike the rule.
I have tried for a long time to change the negative view and skepticism of time-delay. It has all been to no avail. When words fail, when is taking action acceptable?
When getting your way on this issue is worth losing this organizer/director.
Do you want to be right, or do you want to play chess?
See if you can find a way to do both.
Or not.
True, and would remain true even if there were a lot of delay clocks in your area. What you can say, though, is that any player who furnishes a delay clock (and knows how to set it, and is on time for the round, etc) has the right to insist on the use of the delay in his game. One by one, the players will be introduced to delay in this way (because they’ll eventually be paired against an opponent who insists on the delay). Most of them will end up liking it, and you’ll be on your way.
Another thing that might help is if you do not deduct 5 minutes from the main control in games using the delay. (Some players, and a few TDs, apparently think the 5-minute deduction is mandatory, but it is not, and in fact it is not even the default.) If players using the delay are not “penalized” 5 minutes, they are more likely to accept the concept.
Bill Smythe
I would think the opponent playing the person with the delay clock would like the extra time. However I suspect players without delay clocks who don’t end out playing that player would not like the idea that someone in the tournament is getting an extra 5 seconds per move if no time was deducted. So in this case deducting the 5 minutes might seem fairer to those players.